# CALIFORNIA RESOURCES CENTRAL VALLEY — Warning Letter

- **operation:** document
- **citation:** CPF 520121022W
- **title:** CALIFORNIA RESOURCES CENTRAL VALLEY — Warning Letter
- **source type:** enforcement
- **agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- **status:** historical
- **official:** true
- **published on:** 2012-11-07
- **effective on:** Not available
- **summary:** CLOSED warning letter citing 192.616(i).
- **machine formats:** - **json:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520121022w.json
- **markdown:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520121022w.md
- **app url:** https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-enforcement-520121022w
- **source url:** https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-data/case/520121022W
**body:**

Warning Letter involving CALIFORNIA RESOURCES CENTRAL VALLEY. PHMSA's enforcement data identifies the cited regulation as 192.616(i). The case was opened on 2012-11-07 and is reported as closed as of 2012-11-07. Open the official case record for notices, responses, orders, and the latest status.

Official case documents:

520121022W_Warning Letter_11072012.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520121022W/520121022W_Warning%20Letter_11072012.pdf

520121022W_warning letter_11072012_text.pdf: https://primis.phmsa.dot.gov/enforcement-documents/520121022W/520121022W_warning%20letter_11072012_text.pdf

520121022W_warning letter_11072012_text.pdf

WARNING LETTER
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
November 7, 2012
Mr. Dennis Newman
HES Manager
Vintage Production California, LLC
900 Ming Avenue, Suite 300
Bakersfield, CA 93311
CPF 5-2012-1022W
Dear Mr. Newman:
On March 9, 2012, a representative of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), pursuant to Chapter 601 of 49 United States Code, inspected your
Public Awareness Program Effectiveness at your office in Bakersfield, California.
As a result of the inspection, it appears that you have committed a probable violation of the
Pipeline Safety Regulations, Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. The items inspected and
the probable violation is:
1. §192.616 Public Awareness
(i) The operator's program documentation and evaluation results must be
available for periodic review by appropriate regulatory agencies.
Vintage Production California LLC did not have program documentation of annual audits
from 2007 through 2011. Per 49 CFR §192.616(c), the operator must follow the general
program recommendations, including baseline and supplemental requirements of API RP
1162, unless the operator provides justification in its program or procedural manual as to why
compliance with all or certain provisions of the recommended practice is not practicable and
not necessary for safety.



API RP 1162, Section 8.3 guidance states, “Has the operator performed an audit or review of
its program implementation annually since it was developed? If not, did the operator provide
justification in its program or procedural manual?” Vintage Production California LLC did
not have documentation of annual audits from 2007 through 2011. Vintage Production
California LLC only had documentation for 2012.
Under 49 United States Code, § 60122, you are subject to a civil penalty not to exceed
$100,000 for each violation for each day the violation persists up to a maximum of
$1,000,000 for any related series of violations. We have reviewed the circumstances and
supporting documents involved in this case, and have decided not to conduct additional
enforcement action or penalty assessment proceedings at this time. We advise you to correct
the item(s) identified in this letter. Failure to do so will result in Vintage Production
California LLC being subject to additional enforcement action.
No reply to this letter is required. If you choose to reply, in your correspondence please refer
to CPF 5-2012-1022W. Be advised that all material you submit in response to this
enforcement action is subject to being made publicly available. If you believe that any
portion of your responsive material qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C. 552(b),
along with the complete original document you must provide a second copy of the document
with the portions you believe qualify for confidential treatment redacted and an explanation of
why you believe the redacted information qualifies for confidential treatment under 5 U.S.C.
552(b).
Sincerely,
Chris Hoidal
Director, Western Region
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
cc: PHP-60 Compliance Registry
PHP-500 T. Finch (#136119)
2
- **truncated:** false
- **body characters:** 3801